Player Stats

Donte Harden College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Scrimmage yards
2,426
Rushing yards
1,947
Receiving yards
479
Touchdowns
13

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2007 Regular SeasonOhio126260044.9
2008 Regular SeasonOhio7600454146462
2009 PostseasonOhio10000035.5
2009 Regular SeasonOhio1029223755235.5
2010 PostseasonOhio725250045
2010 Regular SeasonOhio723021911345
2011 PostseasonOhio12844737077.8
2011 Regular SeasonOhio121,169939230477.8

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2011 Postseason

Ohio paired 1,253 primary output with 56.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

2011 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 56.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2011 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Temple

Win driven by a workhorse rushing load. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.

Analysis workspace

Season Workbench

Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2011 Postseason · Ohio

Games

12

Scrimmage Yards / G

104.4

Efficiency

56.5

Usage

29.4

Consistency

70.4

Best Game by takeover score

Temple

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Utah State: 84. New Mexico State: 83. Gardner-Webb: 105. Marshall: 87. Buffalo: 116. Ball State: 109. Akron: 129. Temple: 259. Central Michigan: 27. Bowling Green: 94. Miami (OH): 73. Northern Illinois: 87

Volume vs Efficiency

Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.

Low volumeHigh quality

High volumeHigh quality

Low volumeLower quality

High volumeLower quality

Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.

Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Utah State: 19 by 38. New Mexico State: 16 by 55.4. Gardner-Webb: 14 by 76.4. Marshall: 11 by 65.8. Buffalo: 18 by 66.6. Ball State: 22 by 48.6. Akron: 24 by 57.3. Temple: 22 by 99.1. Central Michigan: 6 by 46.9. Bowling Green: 20 by 45.3. Miami (OH): 21 by 37.8. Northern Illinois: 21 by 41.3

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins104.6 · Games = 9 · +0.6 vs Losses
Losses104 · Games = 3 · -0.6 vs Wins